Scoring Rubric for Short, Research-based Position Paper

Undergraduate Cognitive Psychology, Anne L. Fay, Carnegie Mellon University

Dimension / Sophisticated / Competent / Needs Work
Introduction / Position and exceptions, if any, are clearly stated. Organization of the argument is completely and clearly outlined and implemented. 4-5 pts / Position is clearly stated. Organization of argument is clear in parts or only partially described and mostly implemented. 2-3 pts / Position is vague. Organization of argument is missing, vague, or not consistently maintained.
0-1 pts
Research / Research selected is highly relevant to the argument, is presented accurately and completely – the method, results, and implications are all presented accurately; Theory is relevant, accurately described and all relevant components are included; relationship between research and theory is clearly articulated and accurate.
8– 10 pts / Research is relevant to the argument and is mostly accurate and complete – there are some unclear components or some minor errors in the method, results or implications. Theory is relevant and accurately described, some components may not be present or are unclear. Connection to theory is mostly clear and complete, or has some minor errors. 5 – 7 pts / Research selected is not relevant to the argument or is vague and incomplete – components are missing or inaccurate or unclear. Theory is not relevant or only relevant for some aspects; theory is not clearly articulated and/or has incorrect or incomplete components. Relationship between theory and research is unclear or inaccurate, major errors in the logic are present.
0 – 4 pts
Conclusions / Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to the research and position are clear and relevant. The underlying logic is explicit.
4-5 pts / Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to research and position are mostly clear, some aspects may not be connected or minor errors in logic are present. 2-3 pts / Conclusion may not be clear and the connections to the research are incorrect or unclear or just a repetition of the findings without explanation. Underlying logic has major flaws; connection to position is not clear.
Writing / Paper is coherently organized and the logic is easy to follow. There are no spelling or grammatical errors and terminology is clearly defined. Writing is clear and concise and persuasive. 4-5 pts / Paper is generally well organized and most of the argument is easy to follow. There are only a few minor spelling or grammatical errors, or terms are not clearly defined. Writing is mostly clear but may lack conciseness. 2-3 pts / Paper is poorly organized and difficult to read – does not flow logically from one part to another. There are several spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms may not be defined or are poorly defined. Writing lacks clarity and conciseness. 0-1 pts

Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon University